Swearing, It's not big, and it's not clever. Maybe. Options

[Hobbes]

F*** you!

Whilst ensuring you do not break forum rules (i.e. probably best not to list your favourite obscenities), I would be interested to hear your opinions on swearing/cussing/cursing.

I wouldn't say that I swear a lot. I'm not the kind of person to stick the f-word several times into one sentence, but I'd happily admit to swearing. I am always careful not to do so in front of people that do not like it, and I always ensure that there's nobody in ear-shot that would also be unhappy about it. I'm not out to cause offence...

But that's where my query really lies. Can a single word actually BE offensive? My opinion is that people can be offended by a word, but it isn't the fault of the word itself. The person has chosen (or been conditioned) to be offended. Randomly generate four letters and, eventually, you might get the F-word. What suddenly makes this combination of letters offensive? It is just a word.

Personally, if I try to remember moments when I have been offended by what a person has said to me, it never has anything to do with them 'effing and blinding'. Call me arrogant, or obnoxious, or ignorant, etc. and I am likely to feel the negative effects. But telling me to f*** off doesn't, for me, cause any more offence than telling me to get lost.

A few friends of mine will happily use any profanity they can think of... except the c-word. And, indeed, one in particular hates the word, and is extremely unhappy to hear it in any situation. I find this interesting: every single word is fine, every combination of letters is fine, except one. Gather up four innocent letters in a particular way and suddenly they become "harmful".

Should people be offended by language? Is it right to be? Is it petty, or archaic?

The rules of this forum promote correct use of the English language, and I whole-heartedly support that (I am not disputing the rules here, I am just using them as a point of reference). We are encouraged to write proper sentences to the best of our abilities - I think this is marvellous - and we are encouraged to avoid using "offensive" language because of the varying visitors to the site. A fair load of profanities have been censored in the past, and a handful have been allowed due to the situation/circumstances of the post. It all makes sense. But I do find the concept of 'bad language' (beyond the confines of this forum) to be interesting.

Here's another point...

As Mata writes in the forum rules: "Anyway, it's far more fun to be creative with your swearing, 'arsebuckets' is a favorite of mine". The word 'arse'/'ass' has joined the likes of 'damn', 'crap', 'bloody' and 'shag' (and, to a slightly lesser extent, 'bugger') as being pretty acceptable. Sure, they won't be found within children's television, but they all can be found in some pre-watershed programming (UK examples would be various soaps, some sit-coms, etc.). But twenty-years ago, this wasn't the case. The Harry Potter films - undeniably made to appeal to kids of many age groups - has 'bloody' and 'bugger' in them. So some swearing has become okay?

Except, obviously, the words themselves haven't evolved to become acceptable. Just social opinion of them. The "strongest" language (c-word, f-word) can be seen and heard fairly regularly in media now (the latter more than the former, admittedly), as long as there are sufficient warnings and ratings. But there was a time when neither would ever have been heard on television.

I have censored myself in this post when mentioning the words that are considered to be higher up the scale of profanity. And SOME of the media does the same. Interestingly, I read a comment from one broadcaster earlier today that mentioned cases where bleeping an obscenity had caused more complaints than they'd have predicted had they let it be heard. Everybody KNOWS what was said, covering up the word has never stopped an intelligent person from being entirely aware what it was originally, so why is that actually okay? Hearing it vs. knowing it? Hmm. But the point the broadcaster was making, was that the complaints were actually along the lines of: "Why are you treating us like fools? Don't pretend we are stupid by censoring this material. Don't assume what we will or won't find offensive."

In general, I think Radio 4 listeners have a high tolerance for swearing. We had 20 or so complaints in this case. But we attract just as many when we bleep or edit out swearing. Listeners argue we are insulting their intelligence and censoring when we do it. - Peter Rippon, BBC

Will there come a point when the REALLY BAD WORDS are no longer censored, but just provide us (as they already do) with a negative extreme in our language.? Will 'damn' edge its way into Peppa Pig and The Tellytubbies, and the f-word into Eastenders? Probably, to some extent at least. It is fair to say that each generation is more liberal with language use, so perhaps eventually there will be nobody left who finds the words offensive. And we don't really seem to have made any new swear words to take the place of those we don't care about anymore.

So... thoughts, please

Some interesting reading (I guess all NSFW due to language; containing words that you MAY find 'offensive'):

BBC Editorial Guidelines - Language
The XXX Factor: An uncensored history of swearing on TV
BBC Blog: To swear or not to swear

[Moosh]

I would agree that words themselves are not inherently offensive, it's the usage that matters. In that spirit, I shall not censor any word I use in this post, because the usage is in a discussion about swearing. They are not aimed at anyone or anything, and are therefore, in my view, not offensive. If the mods disagree with me on this, they are, of course, welcome to edit.

Now, I swear in general conversation, because I see no reason not to, and I like to use the full extent of my vocabulary. On the other hand, I wouldn't use swear words in, say a dissertation, or when talking to my grandmother, or rather if I did use swear words, it'd be in a different way. For example, I'd have no qualms about quoting a swear word in an academic context, or if I were, for some reason, to be writing an essay about swearing, it'd be silly to censor myself. Similarly, if I were relating an anecdote in which swearing occurs, I wouldn't change it to suit the audience. It's all a matter of context.

An interesting point is the "level" of a swearword. Why does lady part carry more expressive power than damn? Is it more offensive to be told to fuck off than bugger off? Surely the offence lies in the intent behind the statement, the idea that whoever it is doesn't want you to be there, and that matters to you in some way. The form of words that they use to express that idea should be irrelevant. Indeed the tone of voice, body language and the rest of it can make bugger off a lot more offensive than fuck off, in certain situations. lady part is an interesting case. Unlike most swearwords, and more in common with racial epithets, it's usage is tied up with the idea of prejudice and discrimination. So as a word, it has power because of the history attached to it. However, it only has that power if you give it to it. That is, using the word in a derogatory or aggressive manner gives it a power that using it in a casual way doesn't, to my mind it's only offensive in the former case.

Something that annoys me, currently manifested in the amazon box below where I'm typing this, is censorship of media titles. There's a book advertised below called "Watch Your F*cking Language" (sic). That's the kind of thing that makes me want to swear, if you're going to choose a title, for God's sake have the balls to write it properly. Similarly, when I'm watching tv, there are often announcements like "Up next, *bleep* My Dad Said". It's not called *bleep* My Dad Said, it's called Shit My Dad Said. If you're not grown up enough to say the word shit without being scared someone's going to tell your mummy then you shouldn't be working in television.

So yeah, offensive language is offensive because of the meaning behind it, not the words you use. Of course it's possible to be unintentionally offensive, I can't think of an example right now involving swearing, but there are many examples of, say, racism that are still offensive even if you weren't trying to be derogatory. But again that's about ignorance, prejudice and so on, not about the words that you use. It's not racist because you said nigger, it's racist because you said it with the context of the history of that word and what it represents. The word isn't racist in and of itself, but it's use is s huge indicator of racism in the meaning behind it. Not always a correct indicator of course, since I've said nigger twice in this paragraph and I'll happily defend their use as non-racist if anyone thinks it is.

I'm not sure whether any of this is making any kind of sense, I'm tired, I have work to do and I don't have time to go polish this up. So I'll sum up by saying that if you want to be offensive, you can do so with or without swearwords, if you want to be inoffensive, ditto. If people cared more about what people meant than the words that they used, we could all get along better.

[Hobbes]

[The C-word] is an interesting case. Unlike most swearwords, and more in common with racial epithets, it's usage is tied up with the idea of prejudice and discrimination. So as a word, it has power because of the history attached to it. However, it only has that power if you give it to it. That is, using the word in a derogatory or aggressive manner gives it a power that using it in a casual way doesn't, to my mind it's only offensive in the former case.

Hmm, yeah, but I think it's more the misogynistic overtones with that one, which I consider different from the sweariness

To be entirely honest, I've been entirely ignorant of the possible misogynistic overtones of the C-word. Until you pointed it out, I had never even considered it - even though it is entirely obvious. I guess because whenever I might make of the word as an 'insult' or 'faux-insult', the literal meaning of it never even occurs to me. Chances are there was quite a long gap between me learning the word, and discovering what it actually referred to. I suppose, personally, I never consider that aspect of it when I use the C-word, and I do find it difficult to understand the fuss about it - in the same way that I have no issue with insults based on male genitals.

But then as an argument, "It's okay 'cause there's opposite swears that expresse misandry instead", is about as good as saying, "It's okay to use racist nicknames for [X] because they have ones for us too!".

Hmmm...

I don't have any problem with lingual evolution leading to certain words becoming more "acceptable". Yes it will take time for it to filter through the generations and become in standard use, but if that means a reduced amount of fuss about a few letters, then that's great. The F-word is said far more often (and without shock) by those younger than me, than I ever said at their age. And so, eventually, the taboo-factor will be worn away.

I tend to feel more "offended" by hearing the word 'like' used repeatedly in a single sentence, than hearing regular swearing.